I came across this article in the LA Times while doing some research, and found it very interesting in light of the 1) the current efforts at Pitt to adopt a comprehensive nondiscrimination policy regarding trans persons; and 2) the incident that happened at UP Johnstown where a trans student was offered a separate locker room/shower facility, but wouldn’t accept that calling it discriminatory.

In the Pitt policy situation, I believe a part of the discussion surrounds the idea of balancing safety, respect, equity, and meeting the requests of all students, staff, and faculty. In the UP Johnstown case, it seems to me that the student wanted to use the Men’s locker room as if it was another way of demonstrating his maleness.

Here is my question for you- please comment below:

It is one thing to discuss nondiscrimination as a concept, but how does that change when put into practical situations like shower facilities, locker rooms, prisons, etc. Maybe nondiscrimination is the same, and a concept can be equally applied everywhere. Maybe not.  In the case of the Prison story here, is it better for the LAPD to segregate these persons for safety? Others might call that an act of discrimination. What do you think?

Responding to incidents of violence against transgender arrestees, the Los Angeles Police Department plans to open a segregated lockup for biologically male and female suspects who identify themselves as members of the opposite sex, officials said.

By early May, a 24-bed transgender module will open at the LAPD women’s jail downtown, the first such police lockup in the nation, according to Capt. Dave Lindsay, the jail division commander.

“This is a major change,” Lindsay said. It will allow for “an environment that’s safe and secure, as there’s been a history of violence against transgender people.

via LAPD plans separate jail for transgender suspects – latimes.com.